A. Basic facts (1) B, around 09:30 on December 8, 2014, driven by C (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”) and proceeded two-lanes in front of the three-lane distance from the Cropic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic s

(2) The Plaintiff did not wear the safety labelling at the time of the instant accident.

(3) The defendant is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive insurance contract with respect to the defendant vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 5, 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above fact of recognition of liability, the defendant is liable for the damages suffered by the plaintiff due to the accident of this case as the insurer of the defendant vehicle.

C. The Plaintiff’s fault that did not wear the safety level at the time of the instant accident, and the Plaintiff’s above mistake contributed to the expansion of damages, and the Defendant’s responsibility is limited to 95%.

2. In addition to the following separate statements within the scope of the liability for damages, the corresponding item of the Schedule of Calculation of Compensation for Damages as follows, and the period for the convenience of calculation shall, in principle, be calculated on a monthly basis, but less than the last month and less than KRW 1 shall be discarded.

The calculation of the current value at the time of the accident shall be based on the reduction rate of 5/12 percent per month to deduct the interim interest.

In addition, it is rejected that the parties' arguments are not stated separately.

[Reasons for Recognition] A.4 to 11 evidence, each entry of Eul 2 to 6 evidence, and the college of Korea National University of this Court.